Judge Bork’s Concept of the Law of Nations is Seriously Mistaken

1985 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-105
Author(s):  
Anthony D’Amato
Keyword(s):  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Palestine Liberation Organization ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Considerable Controversy ◽  
The Law

A recent decision of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic, is sparking considerable controversy and will undoubtedly be examined at length in law journals. The events in issue occurred March 8, 1978, when 13 heavily armed members of the Palestine Liberation Organization left Lebanon for Israel under instructions to seize and hold Israeli civilians in ransom for the release of PLO members incarcerated in Israel. On the main highway between Haifa and Tel Aviv, they stopped and seized a civilian bus, a taxi, a passing car, and later a second civilian bus, taking the passengers hostage. While proceeding toward Tel Aviv with their hostages gathered in the first bus, the terrorists fired on and killed numerous occupants of passing cars as well as some of their own passengers. They also tortured some of their hostages. At a shoot-out with the police at a police barricade, the terrorists shot more of their hostages and then blew up the bus with grenades. As a result of the terrorists’ actions, 22 adults and 12 children were killed, and 63 adults and 14 children were seriously wounded.

United States v. Dire

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 644-649 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene Kontorovich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The World ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The U.S

In the first criminal piracy decision by a United States court in nearly a century, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that the federal piracy statute’s reference to the “law of nations” explicitly ties the scope of the offense to evolving customary international law definitions of the crime. The court went on to find that under current customary and treaty law, attempted piracy falls within the scope of the international crime. In doing so, it joined several courts in nations around the world that have confronted the issue as a result of the outbreak of Somali piracy that began in 2008.

Protection in Ascent, 1908–23

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Woloch
Keyword(s):  
Women Workers ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Minimum Wage ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Children's Hospital ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Children’S Hospital ◽  
The Law ◽  
Made In

This chapter examines Muller's aftermath in legal history through the landmark case of Adkins v. Children's Hospital (1923). In Oregon, an employer (Children's Hospital) sought an injunction against the DC Minimum Wage Board to restrain it from imposing the minimum wage of $16.50 per week for women workers in hotels, hospitals, restaurants, clubs, and apartment houses. The District of Columbia Supreme Court upheld the law in June 1920, as did the DC Court of Appeals in June 1921. However, at the second hearing in November 1922, the DC Court of Appeals upset the law. In 1923, when Adkins v. Children's Hospital reached the Supreme Court, defenders of the minimum wage faced a less receptive roster of justices than they had in 1917; recent appointments made in wartime and soon after had produced a more conservative court. As such, the Supreme Court failed to sustain the District of Columbia minimum wage law by a 5–3 decision.

In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

1981 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-170
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Foreign State ◽  
The Law

In enacting section 1605(a)(1) of the FSIA, Congress manifestly intended that an arbitration agreement should constitute a waiver of foreign sovereign immunity. The legislative history expressly mentions as examples of implicit waivers “cases where a foreign state has agreed to arbitration in another country or where a foreign state has agreed that the law of a particular country should govern a contract.” H. Rep. No. 94-1487 at 18. To date, only one other court has had occasion to interpret and apply the waiver provision of section 1605(a)(1) with respect to the enforcement of foreign judgments, and it reached the same result as the court below, viz., that an agreement to arbitrate in a third country constitutes a waiver of foreign sovereign immunity.

Hobbes among the Classic Jurists

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Boucher
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Law Of Nature ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Complete Identification ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Hedley Bull ◽  
Hans Morgenthau

The classic foundational status that Hobbes has been afforded by contemporary international relations theorists is largely the work of Hans Morgenthau, Martin Wight, and Hedley Bull. They were not unaware that they were to some extent creating a convenient fiction, an emblematic realist, a shorthand for all of the features encapsulated in the term. The detachment of international law from the law of nature by nineteenth-century positivists opened Hobbes up, even among international jurists, to be portrayed as almost exclusively a mechanistic theorist of absolute state sovereignty. If we are to endow him with a foundational place at all it is not because he was an uncompromising realist equating might with right, on the analogy of the state of nature, but instead to his complete identification of natural law with the law of nations. It was simply a matter of subject that distinguished them, the individual and the state.

Israel and Palestine: Assault on the Law of Nations

1982 ◽  
Vol 91 (8) ◽  
pp. 1726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony D'Amato ◽  
Julius Stone
Keyword(s):  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Law

Wells Fargo Asia Ltd. v. Citibank, N.A. Trinh v. Citibank, N.A. Edelmann v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 573-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Dilworth
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Exclusive Jurisdiction ◽  
Foreign State ◽  
The Law ◽  
Exchange Control ◽  
Governmental Action

In these three breach-of-contract actions, United States federal courts considered the liability of home offices of U.S. banks for obligations of their foreign branches in the event of foreign governmental expropriation or exchange control measures. In each decision the court of appeals did not apply the act of state doctrine and gave no effect to the foreign governmental action, largely on the ground either that the situs of the debt was not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the foreign state carrying out the governmental measure at issue or that the law governing the obligation was not that of the foreign state.

A Selection of Cases and Other Readings on the Law of Nations

1930 ◽  
Vol 43 (8) ◽  
pp. 1325
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson ◽  
Edwin DeWitt Dickinson
Keyword(s):  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
Selection Of
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document